r d r : n ideas from a ontextual nalysis · 2019. 4. 30. · violent,” “racists are bad”;...

Behavior and Social Issues, 14, 46-70 (2005). © Bernard Guerin. Readers of this article may copy it withoutthe copyright owner’s permission, if the author and publisher are acknowledged in the copy and the copy isused for educational, not-for-profit purposes.

46

COMBATING EVERYDAY RACIAL DISCRIMINATION WITHOUT

ASSUMING RACISTS OR RACISM: NEW INTERVENTION IDEAS FROM A

CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS

Bernard Guerin1

University of Waikato

ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to open up new forms of intervention against everyday raciallydiscriminating practices by analyzing more specific and localised interventions. It is first argued thatconceptualising the area in the abstract terms of ‘racists’ who possess ‘racism’ is not fruitful, and a variety ofreasons for this are provided. Several common situations that have been researched for everyday racialdiscrimination are then reviewed for the specific practices that have been found. These practices, in turn, aregiven very diverse analyses (Guerin, 2004) of their possible functions, to assuage readers against seekingonly the most obvious ‘cause’. In particular, it is emphasised that many practices can be done with ‘goodintentions’ and that those cases need to be conceptualised differently from those with ‘intent’. Finally, avariety of possible intervention goals are provided to deal with each strategy that arises in particular contextsto produce the racially discriminating practices. All the suggestions provided are meant as guides only andmore detailed research documenting the full contexts for discriminatory practices is urged to guide our futureinterventions instead of trying just to globally ‘raise awareness’ of other cultures.Key Words: racism, racists, interventions, discrimination, social analysis, essentialism

Racism and racial discrimination plague our world and bring unnecessary hardshipto those affected. With limited resources and large populations in this world there willalways be conflict but there is no need for those conflicts to be violent, and it is furthergratuitous for those conflicts to be drawn out along racial divides (Guerin, 2002, 2004).

There have been many approaches to understanding racism and raciallydiscriminating practices and many attempts at preventing or stopping them, across arange of disciplines (e. g., Akrami, Ekehammar & Araya, 2000; Allan & Allan, 2000;Aronson & Patnoe, 1997; ATSIC, 1998; Briggs & Paulson, 1996; Brzuzy, 1998; Cropley,2002; Donovan & Lievers, 1993; Fernández-Caliences, 1995; Graves, 1999; Hewstone,1996; Katz & Zalk, 1978; Lamont, Morning & Mooney, 2002; Liebkind & McAlister,1999; Lindsley, 1998; Pulido, 2000; Reid & Holland, 1996; Sandhu & Aspy, 1997;Slone, Tarrasch & Hallis, 2000; Vrij & Smith, 1999; Wetherell & Potter, 1992; Zajicek,2002). It is not the aim of this paper is to review these. They include all levels ofinterventions such as one-on-one counselling against holding prejudice views, school and

1 This work was supported by grants from the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology(UOWX0203, Strangers in Town: Enhancing Family and Community in a More Diverse New ZealandSociety) and the University of Waikato. I would like to thank Abdirizak Abdi, Roda Omar Diiriye, EmmaWood and Pauline Guerin for their helpful discussions about the reality of racist talk and the reviewers forhelpful comments. Correspondence to: Dr. Bernard Guerin, Department of Psychology, University ofWaikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand. Email: [email protected]

EVERYDAY RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

47

community interventions, media campaigns, and political awareness raising (Guerin,2005).

Such efforts are many and varied but the starting point for this paper is that theevidence that they are effective or have a lasting effect is not strong (Hill & Augoustinos,2001; Kiselica, Maben & Locke, 1999; Pedersen, Walker & Wise, 2005). The questionfor this paper is how to open up some new approaches to intervention that allow newpossibilities in handling such problems. The paper will not come up with the answer butendeavor to broaden the horizons of what might be tried. Suggestions will be made butthese must be taken as suggestions only, and interventions assessed to confirm or adaptthem.

One further limit to this paper is that only “everyday” or “mundane” racist practiceswill be covered (e. g., Broman, Mavaddat & Hsu, 2000; Byng, 1998; Carroll, 1998;Essed, 1991a, 1991b; Feagin, 1991; Hein, 2000). Other events such as rape, physicalviolence and structural racism need to be dealt with through a range of interventionsbeyond the scope of one paper. They are certainly important and they are absent hereonly because they should be treated specifically not because they are consideredunimportant.

In order to open up the arena of interventions available it is necessary to challengesome assumptions in this area. One common feature of most of the current interventionattempts is the assumption that the racist talk or discrimination stems from a property ofpeople called racism, with such people being called racists. Not all models explicitlyattribute the cause to this, but it is inherent in most current models (see Verkuyten, 2003).Most interventions, likewise, are based on this basic idea and aim to change the general“awareness,” education or understanding that people have of their racism or racistbehaviour, or raise the general “awareness” of other cultures and races, with the idea thatthis will change those people’s actions.

Such models are shown in the top part of Figure 1. People are racist and this leadsthem to various racist practices (A). The implication of this is that to change the state ofthings we need to reduce or stop people’s racism and that will stop them doing thevarious racially discriminating practices (B). This is an essentialist way of looking atracism.

It is important to be clear at this point, that for those experiencing racism this islikely how they experience such events since everyday attributions are heavily focused oninternal attributions (Miller, 1984). Such internal attributions are strategically ordiscursively useful for everyday conversation, for example, by allowing reference to anegative out-group, by allowing a conception of the problem beyond an abstractsocial/structural cause, by shifting the responsibility for change to other person, or bymaking it more difficult for someone to challenge your statements (Edwards & Potter,1993; Guerin, 2003a). So there are good reasons why people would experience things thisway. The argument is also not saying that if we refrain from explaining such practices interms of an internalized “racism” then those people doing such things can be excusedsomehow. The argument is saying that such practices are still bad and need to be changed

GUERIN

48

DiscriminationsPrecursors

Housing

Employment

Housing

Employment

Racists

Etc.

Media representation

Jokes, slurs

Jokes, slurs

Etc.

A

B

Housing

Employment

Jokes, slurs


Housing Interventions

Verbal Interventions

Employment Interventions

Media Interventions

Other Interventions

C

Etc.


Racists afterGeneralized Awareness

Intervention

Figure 1. Traditional Ways of Viewing Racism (A) and Interventions against Racism (B), with theConceptual Model of this Paper (C).

but that explaining them conceptually (verbally, discursively) as caused by racists orracism does not help. As has happened many times, psychology and the other socialsciences have taken the common lay-attributions of what causes a problem (“Somepeople are racists”) and worked to solve those problems (“How do we change people’sracism?”) without rethinking these everyday internal attributions more contextually (“Inwhat contexts will people do these discriminating practices?”). So the argument does notdeny the everyday experience of people in such situations that they are being raciallydiscriminated against and that such episodes are extremely painful and stressful to them,just how that gets talked about and what should be done about it.

The point, then is that models such as Figure 1A have a certain conceptual efficiencyabout them: that we can get at the source quite easily—racist people and their racism—in


49

order to make changes that will have far-reaching ripple-effects over an extensive varietyof their behaviours and situations (Figure 1B). On the other hand, such conceptualefficiency can be misleading, and the use of such abstract and essentialistic terms merelya discursive strategy to satisfy our academic or lay audiences (Guerin, 2001b, 2003a). Butit is no use satisfying the listeners of our conceptual talk if we cannot make any relatedchanges in the real world of racially discriminative actions and consequences. That is, thefunctioning of the conceptual talk about reducing racism and changing racists might bemore for the benefit of having an influence on listeners than for doing anything about theproblem (Guerin, 2003b). This applies to the talk of both lay-persons and academics.While “awareness-raising” interventions no doubt have some extremely beneficialeffects, this paper attempts to put the language surrounding such interventions into amore contextual framework (Guerin, 2005).

The aim of this paper, therefore, is to suggest some alternative avenues both forconceptualizing the problem of racial discrimination and also for interventions, withoutrecourse to calling people racists or assuming that there is a property of the world calledracism that people “possess” sometimes. This in line with a broader attempt at taking ourexplanations and conceptualizations out of the person—away from internal oressentialistic attributions—and looking at the social, economic, historical and culturalcontexts out of which the actions and practices arise, and from these analyses deriveinterventions (Bentley, 1908, 1935; Guerin, 2001a,b, 2004; Smail, 2001).

WHY COMBATING “RACISTS” AND “RACISM” IS NOT THE ANSWER

We have seen that traditionally this field has been conceptualized in terms of racistsand racisms, both of which need to be changed by interventions. It is worthwhile goingthrough some of the arguments against these terms.

Talk About Racists and Racism is Essentialistic Just Like Racist Talk

The talk about racists and racism is typically itself comprised of multiple internalattributions, referring to some property of a person (they are racist) or some essentialistproperty of a person’s actions (the actions incorporate or embody racism). Both thesehave the typical rhetorical or conversational properties of internal attributions (Guerin,2003a; Verkuyten, 2001) which might explain why their use is so widespread. In thisway, the essentialistic nature of the terms “racists” and “racism” mirrors what the“racists” themselves are doing—positing characteristics of a group or person (“Blacks areviolent,” “Racists are bad”; “Fundamentalism is evil,” “Racism is bad”).

Talk About Racists and Racism Is Both Abstract and General

The talk about racists and racism is typically both abstract and general, againallowing several rhetorical properties for those using such language (Guerin, 2003a,2004). For example, the use of abstractness and generality allow hedging on theconsequences of whatever might have been said. Common hedges are words such as

GUERIN

50

“probably” or “maybe,” as in, “I think that all Africans are probably weaker in willpower than us.” Abstractness and generality, however, also allow a wide berth of hedgingsince any contradictions or challenges can be explained away as exceptions. They give anillusion of attributing facts over a wide range of cases, but can also be seen as adiscursive strategy.

It Is Not Clear What Needs Changing

Combining the first two points to some extent, talk of racists and racism is vague asto what actually needs changing. One cannot see a person’s racism, and talk of “subtleracism” and other new words does not help. This is characteristic of campaigns toincrease people’s “awareness” of racism: that the main conceptual words are notobservable and are generalized across people, settings, behaviour, and time. What is donemight work but the language is unhelpful.

Racism Interventions Are Not Very Successful

The evidence is that interventions built from these foundations are not working well,and what effects are measured cannot be uniquely assigned to a cause (Hill &Augoustinos, 2001; Kiselica, Maben & Locke, 1999; Pedersen, Walker & Wise, 2005).Most of the interventions tried are based upon trying to change the “racism” in a person(see A and B in Figure 1) in a generic way.

New Conceptions Are Moving Away From Internal Explanations Within Psychology

Much of the emphasis in psychology on explanations in terms of the person andindividuality can be seen as misguided, in many concrete ways (Bentley, 1908, 1935;Guerin, 2001a, b, 2004; Smail, 2001). If actions that previously have been attributed to“internal” or agency explanations can be thought of now as social in origin, the emphasisupon attributing “racism” to a “racist” disappears also, and a contextual analysis of thesocial and historical contexts for these behaviours might be more useful.

Talking About Racism Depends Heavily On the Social Context

The evidence is clear that whether or how people talk in racist ways is heavilydependent upon the social context. Tusting, Crawshaw, and Callen (2002), for example,found that their participants steered away from racist and sexist comments inquestionnaires and diary formats but made such comments when in a focus group of like-minded people. It is still not clear what caused these differences: it could have been thesocial support for making racist and sexist comments; it could have been that there is lessmonitorability and accountability in speaking situations than in writing situations becausethere is no record (Guerin, 2004). Whichever might be found to be true with moreresearch, properties of the social context changed what was said and done, and this againmakes the idea of a common racism possessed by a person as the cause even weaker.


51

Even if it is argued that the social context merely facilitates or inhibits the “expression”of a person’s internal racism, the social context still needs a close examination.

Racists are Diverse, Too

In line with the point above that talking about people being racist is using the samediscursive strategy as racists use in their talk, lumping people as racists likewise ignoresthe diversity. “Racists” can be thought of as neo-Nazi skinheads who take everyopportunity to aggress physically against Asian and other racial groups, or as a“harmless” joker in the workplace who occasionally makes a racist joke prefaced by “I’mnot a racist, but a friend told me this funny story about ....” Considering this diversity, theconceptual efficiency of talking about “racists” all having a common thread of “racism”wears very thin, and it would be doubtful whether a single intervention would succeedwith both these examples. Using categories can be part of many strategies (Guerin,2003b).

People Easily Deny Being Racist and Can Therefore Ignore Interventions

There are many verbal strategies that make it easy for people to deny that they are“racists” (Barnes, Palmary, & Durrheim, 2001; Guerin, 2003a, b; van Dijk 1983, 1987,1992). These might only work within certain audiences or groups, but if people restrictthemselves to those groups then they can maintain an image of non-racist. This meansthat intervention attempts are unlikely to work since the person has avoided beinglabelled as racist and hence the intervention (Guerin, 2003a).

Blaming People For Being Racists Is Not Useful

Finally, blaming people for being racist is probably not helpful in the long run, anddoes not help develop new interventions. The full responsibility for such situations isgiven to the person or something “internal” to the person and interventions do not workwell based on this (Kitzinger, 2000; Wilkinson & Kitzinger, 2000). While ethically andlegally we do not wish to remove such responsibility for what they do—because the racistpractices are certainly insidious—and while such people need to be held accountable fortheir actions under western law, for research and intervention we need to go beyond thisstance.

REMOVING RACISTS AND RACISM THROUGH A CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS

The aim then is to produce a way of talking about and researching raciallydiscriminating practices without recourse to calling people racists or assigning the causeto racism. To begin this task, which will require more direct research in the long run, Ipresent an analysis of some situations and practices of racially discriminating practicesfollowing the integrated framework of Guerin (2004). The aim is to broaden ourconceptions beyond racists and racisms, and draw in more potential avenues for

GUERIN

52

intervention. The real research on these concrete situations still needs to be done beyondmy mere suggestions. This is also why I have resisted grouping possible functionalanalyses together at this stage (e.g., later in Table 3). Functional analyses should not bedone theoretically but through research. We could try lumping together the similarlooking functions I will present but similar forms do not mean similar functions—thatawaits further interventional research.

Table 1 presents a number of situations of discrimination based along racial lines,the details of particular practices, and a few examples of relevant research. These comefrom the literature and, to some extent, the situations might reflect the research that hasbeen carried out and published. There are likely to be other situations that have not beenresearched and therefore not included here. So I will limit myself to these situations butthere are certainly others that can fruitfully be dealt with in the same way. The aim of thispaper is to only give the idea rather than attempt to deal exhaustively with all situationsof racially discriminating practices or to come up with definitive functions.

One thing in common for each area is that the most common intervention is toprovide some sort of global cultural or racial awareness training or “educational” packageand hope this changes the specific practices listed in Figure 1A. As shown in Figure 1B,the assumption made is that global awareness training will affect all situations of raciallydiscriminating practices. The argument of this paper, on the other hand, is that the use ofrace as a verbal or practical category can be a profitable discursive resource in manysituations but that does not mean that those situations are tied together in any way(Guerin, 2003b).

I am arguing then that we must resist assuming the common situations havecommon causes, and that this view is promulgated by talking in common terms of racistsand racism. In fact, we do not know from any research whether someone who raciallydiscriminates in one of these contexts is more or less likely to discriminate in another.That is an empirical question on the whole, and one that would be useful to carry out. Apriori we cannot assume that the person who bullies along racial lines in an institutionalsetting is also someone who would make racial jokes in public. If these practices docohere we need to find that out rather than assume it to be so. It is likely that many peoplewho show racial discrimination in one situation can claim a host of other situations inwhich they do not—although this usually done in their defence when accused.

What Are the Situations of Everyday Racist Practices?

The main situations that have been researched are education, employment, housing,everyday life, shopping, using bureaucracies, in conversations, in the media, policing,and social relationships. Table 1 presents some of the racially discriminatory practicesfound in each situation, based on previous literature and our research experience.

Education. Many racially discriminating practices have been researched ineducation, involving both students (e.g., name-calling) and teachers (e.g., singlingchildren out). Bullying, harassment, physical abuse, and teasing are other forms found in


53

TABLE 1. FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AS A FUNCTION OF SITUATION

SituationExamples of Racially

Discriminating Practices Examples of Research

Education Bullying Pepler et al. (1999)Harassment Connolly & Keenan (2002)Name calling Connolly & Keenan (2002);

Mellor (2003); Connolly (2000)Physical abuses Connolly & Keenan (2002)Singled out Connolly & Keenan (2002)Jokes/ Teasing Connolly & Keenan (2002);

Mellor (2003)

Employment/Work Hiring biases Byng (1998); Mesthenos &Ioannidi (2002)

Workplace Brief & Barsky (2000); Byng(1998)

Firing biases Essed (1991a, b)Jokes/ Teasing Mellor (2003)

Housing Family size Dion (2001); Murdie et al.(1995); Dion (2001); Søholt(2001)

Renting Kloos et al. (2002); Mellor(2003); Søholt (2001)

Unfriendly neighbours Søholt (2001)Segregation Flippen (2001)Not providing insurance Byng (1998)

Everyday Social Life General Essed (1991a, b); Feagin (1991)Staring Swim et al. (2003); Mellor

(2003); Byng (1998)Racist graffiti Connolly & Keenan (2002)Avoidance Feagin (1991); Mellor (2003);

Dixon & Durrheim (2003);Essed (1991a, b)

Assuming things Feagin (1991)Name calling Mellor (2003)Jokes/ Teasing Mellor (2003)Failing to help Essed (1991a, b)

GUERIN

54

Discouragement Essed (1991a, b)Withholding Essed (1991a, b)Rudeness Swim et al. (2003)Exclusion Andall (2002); Dixon &

Durrheim (2003)

Shopping Not touching Feagin (1991)Bad service Feagin (1991); Mellor (2003);

Byng (1998)Exclusion Essed (1991a, b); Feagin (1991)Followed around Feagin (1991)Ignoring Mellor (2003); Byng (1998)

Bureaucracy General Gunaratnam (2001); Howitt &Owusu-Bempah (1999);Mesthenos & Ioannidi (2002)

Structural Cropley (2002)Bad service Swim et al. (2003); Byng (1998)Miscommunication Cropley (2002); Howitt &

Owusu-Bempah (1999)Extra checking Andall (2002)Jokes/ Teasing Mellor (2003)

Social Conversation Verbal prejudice Swim et al. (2003); Guerin(2003b)

Jokes/ Teasing Mellor (2003)

Media Representation Mellor (2003)Jokes/ Teasing Mellor (2003)

Police Frequent stopping anddifferent treatment whenquestioning

Hopkins et al. (1992); Bowlinget al. (2004); Broman et al.(2000); Andall (2002); Mellor(2003); Feagin (1991); Hein(2000); Mesthenos & Ioannidi(2002)

the literature. Other terms, such as “exclusion,” cover a number of practices that need tobe broken into separate, more concrete actions.

Employment. Racial discrimination situations in workplaces and employmentinclude many within the decision to hire and the decision to fire—that is, racialdiscrimination in who gets taken on for a job and who is removed. Many other forms are


55

found in the workplace itself, including teasing and joking (Brief & Barsky, 2000;Deitch, Barsky, Butz, Chan, Brief & Bradley, 2003; Gunaratnam, 2001; Holmes, Marra,& Burns, 2001; Mesthenos & Ioannidi, 2002). There are many other forms of institutionalor structural discrimination that are important but they will not be covered here.

Housing. Housing is another life situation in which discriminatory practices havebeen found (Chambon, Hulchanski, Murdie & Teixeira, 1997; Dion, 2001; Flippen, 2001;Morgan, 1999; Murdie, 1999; Murdie, Chambon, Hulchanki & Teixeira, 1995; Novac,1996; Peach, 1998; Ratcliffe, 1999; Salzer, 2000; Søholt, 2001). These have been notedfor renting, relationships with neighbours, segregation of whole neighbourhoods, and inpurchasing insurance. Renting also includes state-allocated housing in countries wherethat is applicable.

In everyday social life. A number of studies have looked at more detail of the racialdiscriminations that go on in everyday social life (Bell & Nkomo, 1998; Broman,Mavaddat & Hsu, 2000; Byng, 1998; Carroll, 1998; Connolly & Keenan, 2002; Essed,1991a, b; Feagin, 1991; Goto, Gee, & Tekeuchi, 2002; Hein, 2000; Mellor, 2003, 2004; ;St. Jean & Feagin, 1998; Swim, Hyers, Cohen, Fitzgerald, & Bylsma, 2003; Trudgen,2000). They record staring, racist graffiti, people avoiding them, people assuming thingsabout them, name calling, teasing, not helping, discouraging, rudeness, exclusion, andpeople withholding things or information from them. Many more await recordingespecially with more of the context recorded so sense can be made of what is happening(Cowlishaw, 2004; Guerin, 2004).

Shopping. There is good documentation of racial discrimination during shoppingthrough not touching when putting change into someone’s hands, giving poor service,excluding groups from the shops, being followed around shops or the expectation thatmembers of the group are likely to steal, and simply ignoring the groups and servingother customers (Feagin, 1991).

Using bureaucracies. When dealing with bureaucracies of all types racialdiscrimination has been recorded: as structural in the way the bureaucracy is set up, poorservice, miscommunications, extra checking of credentials, and teasing (Gunaratnam,2001; Hollands, 2001; Howitt & Owusu-Bempah, 1999; Mesthenos & Ioannidi, 2002).

In conversations. In social conversation racial discrimination is frequent as teasingand joking (Guerin, 2003b), and as the inappropriate or gratuitous use of racial categories(Day, 1998; Guerin, 2003a).

In the media. Similarly, in the media, racial discrimination is frequent as teasing andjoking and as the inappropriate or gratuitous use of racial categories. Mediarepresentations are also studied as showing racial bias in how people are presented.

Policing. Policing has been recorded as discriminatory in making frequent stopswhen a member of a group is seen driving, and treating different groups in different wayswhen questioned or arrested. We should not pre-judge the truth of such accusations butmany serious complaints are made (BBC, 2004; Mesthenos & Ioannidi, 2002; OttawaCitizen, 2003).

GUERIN

56

What we can see from this is that within the category of “racism” there are manyconcrete practices that do not a priori have anything to do with one another. In particular,it has been argued above that for research it is not helpful to invoke “racists” or “racism”as the unifying concepts when looking for the causes of such practices or theinterventions to stop them. Instead, the hard task might be ahead of us of investigatingseparate interventions for each different racially discriminatory practice, as conceptuallyinelegant as that might be to academics. Unfortunately, my conclusion here andelsewhere (Guerin, 2001b) is that the hard work is still ahead of us and we have beenusing commonly used attributional labels as our simple answers to these problems.Hopefully when research is done at a more concrete level there will be consistenciesbetween the different forms and groupings might be made with a better evidence base.

What Are the ‘Racist’ Practices?

Table 2 presents some of the racially discriminatory practices found in each of theareas of Table 1, based on previous literature and our research and experience (Guerin,2004). Along with each are some possible functional analyses that can be made of what isgoing on contextually or strategically in such situations, following discussions in Guerin(2004). The list can no doubt be increased and we hope readers will add their own entriesand future research will provide some documentation of these and other entries.

For those practices that work mainly with language use, potential contextual/functional analyses have been made previously (Guerin, 2003b). In particular, joking,making fun, and telling stories that involve racial discrimination can be done for reasonsnot intended to hurt people of those racial groups—primarily to gain social status within agroup or to have the listeners like you. It can also be done without ‘really’ believing theracial beliefs implicit in such jokes and stories (Guerin, 2003b). This is not to condonesuch uses of racial joking and indeed shows how insidious it can be (Guerin, 2003b).Jokes and verbal abuse can also be made maliciously, however, and very differentanalyses and interventions will be needed for those because more of the social contextwill need to be addressed.

A number of the other possible analyses also involve sometimes well-intentionedpractices that end up being discriminating (assuming things, avoidance, extra checking,failing to help, etc.). This indicates that caution is needed when analysing these inpreparation for interventions. While all forms require intervention and change, and that isnot being disputed here, if the analysis (Guerin, 2004) indicates that it was unintentionalthen different forms of intervention will be required. That is why a full contextualanalysis is always recommended despite the causes and consequences seeming to beobvious (Cowlishaw, 2004; Guerin, 2004).

In all, Table 2 (and Guerin, 2003b) seeks to broaden our conceptions of “racists” and“racism,” make us look at and document more fully the functional contexts for anyracially discriminating practices, and to review and research a variety of possibleanalyses before jumping in with global awareness interventions against what appears tobe the “obvious” intervention for an “obvious” cause. It is tempting at this point to point


57

out the repetition in Table 2 and assume that those functions will have “the same” basisor cause and therefore can be dealt with using the same intervention. For this paper, I amurging the reader to resist this move since that is what the first part of the paper wasarguing against. For example, from Table 2, “not wanting to be seen with you” leading todiscouragement might be radically different in contextual/ functional terms (what it leadsto) than “not wanting to be seen with you” leading to exclusion. At this point we cannot apriori assume that these two amount to the same thing and can be dealt with in oneintervention. To do that is to go back to panel B of Figure 1. We must investigate andintervene with possibly disparate contexts in which these functions arise.

FINDING POSSIBLE NEW INTERVENTIONS FOR RACIAL DISCRIMINATIONS

Most interventions in this area are focused on global awareness, attempting toeducate and get people to understand others and have some empathy for them. What Iwant to look at next are other interventions that try to do something about raciallydiscriminating practices more directly within one of the particular situations we haveexamined earlier. In moving from the situations and practices of Table 1 to the possiblenew intervention goals of Table 3, I have brought in the context and strategies of realsituations that might look the same but with more of the contextual diversity and variety,thus addressing the earlier point that all “racists” are not the same. As mentioned above, Ihave also resisted assuming similar forms have similar functions and therefore needsimilar interventions. This repetition should eventually disappear as real studies increasewhat we know away from possibilities for interventions into what actually works and isbest-evidenced. It would be nice if the repetition coalesced into clean groupings but wecannot assume this without the data.

Once again, like Table 2, the list is not meant to be final or exhaustive, but a promptto brainstorm possible interventions tailored to individual functional contexts. It is hopedthat readers and research can add to this and provide detailed examples of what works forparticular and specific contexts that are systematically identified (Cowlishaw, 2004).While Table 3 does not provide any absolute answers on the interventions required—onlyintervention research can show that—it is clear that this level of analysis and interventionhas a huge scope to replace the global ‘train and hope’ strategies found at present forracial discrimination (such as Stokes & Baer, 1977, described for generalization effects).Each of the generic functions, and many others proffered, can have training and testing intheir own settings.

As indicated in Table 3, the interventions are not meant to be carried out only by thevictims but training given to others around the persons involved such as friends, and evenstrangers in a best possible world (Guerin, 2005). If someone is making fun in a raciallydiscriminating way it would in most cases be more useful for a stranger or friend to makean intervention attempt rather than the victim (Veelenturf, Guerin & Guerin, 2005). Thatwould be the ideal, but sadly in reality many victims must at present either ignore thediscrimination or deal with it themselves, leading to a constant pressure and stress(Feagin, 1991; St. Jean & Feagin, 1998). In fact, we can go further and suggest that

GUERIN

58

TABLE 2. FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN TERMS OF POSSIBLE FUNCTIONALANALYSES.

Discriminations/Complaints Possible Contextual/Functional Analyses

Assuming things Trying to include; making fun; unthinking use ofstereotype; providing you a chance to stand out; taking aneasier option; assuming you want this

Avoidance Not wanting to be seen with you; avoiding an uncertain ordifficult situation; assuming that you prefer avoidance; toavoid any sort of relationship; unable to predict yourbehaviour; unthinking use of stereotype; distrusting; takingan easier option

Bad service Not wanting to be seen with you; trying to exclude; makingfun; unthinking use of stereotype; to avoid any sort ofrelationship; trying to hurt

Bullying Making fun; unthinking use of stereotype; avoiding anuncertain or difficult situation; to avoid any sort ofrelationship; done to enhance own-group status; todenigrate; trying to hurt

Discouragement Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; providingyou a chance to stand out; not wanting you to fail and behurt; avoiding an uncertain or difficult situation; to avoidany sort of relationship; unable to predict your behaviour;miscommunication; trying to hurt

Exclusion Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; unthinkinguse of stereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficultsituation; to avoid any sort of relationship; unable to predictyour behaviour; distrusting; not wanting you to fail and behurt; taking an easier option; assuming you want this; tryingto hurt

Extra checking Trying to include; making fun; unthinking use ofstereotype; providing you a chance to stand out; unable topredict your behaviour; distrusting; miscommunication


59

Failing to help Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; unthinkinguse of stereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficultsituation; to avoid any sort of relationship; unable to predictyour behaviour; taking an easier option; assuming you wantthis

Firing biases Not wanting to be seen with you; unthinking use ofstereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficult situation; toavoid any sort of relationship; taking an easier option

Followed around Trying to include; making fun; unthinking use ofstereotype; unable to predict your behaviour; distrusting

Frequent stopping Making fun; unthinking use of stereotype; unable to predictyour behaviour; distrusting

Harassment Trying to include; unthinking use of stereotype; avoiding anuncertain or difficult situation; to avoid any sort ofrelationship; unable to predict your behaviour; distrusting;trying to hurt

Hiring biases Not wanting to be seen with you; unthinking use ofstereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficult situation; toavoid any sort of relationship; unable to predict yourbehaviour; taking an easier option

Ignoring Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; providingyou a chance to stand out; avoiding an uncertain or difficultsituation; to avoid any sort of relationship; taking an easieroption; assuming you want this; trying to hurt

Jokes/ Teasing Trying to include; making fun; unthinking use ofstereotype; providing you a chance to stand out; avoidingan uncertain or difficult situation; done to enhance own-group status; assuming you want this; trying to hurt

Miscommunication Making fun; avoiding an uncertain or difficult situation; toavoid any sort of relationship; unable to predict yourbehaviour

Name calling Not wanting to be seen with you; trying to include; makingfun; done to enhance own-group status; assuming you wantthis; trying to hurt

Not providing insurance Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; unthinkinguse of stereotype; to avoid any sort of relationship; unableto predict your behaviour; distrusting; taking an easieroption

GUERIN

60

Not touching Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; unthinkinguse of stereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficultsituation; to avoid any sort of relationship; unable to predictyour behaviour; distrusting; assuming you want this; tryingto hurt

Not sitting next to you Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; unthinkinguse of stereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficultsituation; to avoid any sort of relationship; unable to predictyour behaviour; distrusting; taking an easier option;assuming you want this; trying to hurt

Physical abuses Trying to include (if minor); making fun; avoiding anuncertain or difficult situation; to avoid any sort ofrelationship; done to enhance own-group status; trying tohurt

Racist graffiti Making fun; unthinking use of stereotype; done to enhanceown-group status; trying to hurt

Renting Not wanting to be seen with you; unthinking use ofstereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficult situation; toavoid any sort of relationship; unable to predict yourbehaviour; distrusting;

Rudeness Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; avoiding anuncertain or difficult situation; to avoid any sort ofrelationship; done to enhance own-group status;miscommunication; trying to hurt

Segregation Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; unthinkinguse of stereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficultsituation; to avoid any sort of relationship; unable to predictyour behaviour; distrusting; taking an easier option;assuming you want this

Singled out Trying to include; making fun; unthinking use ofstereotype; providing you a chance to stand out; done toenhance own-group status

Staring Trying to include; making fun; unable to predict yourbehaviour; distrusting; to avoid any sort of relationship;trying to hurt


61

Structural Unthinking use of stereotype; avoiding an uncertain ordifficult situation; to avoid any sort of relationship; unableto predict your behaviour; done to enhance own-groupstatus; distrusting; not wanting you to fail and be hurt;rigidity

Unfriendly neighbours Not wanting to be seen with you; making fun; unthinkinguse of stereotype; avoiding an uncertain or difficultsituation; to avoid any sort of relationship; done to enhanceown-group status; distrusting; taking an easier option;miscommunication

Verbal prejudice Trying to include; making fun; unthinking use ofstereotype; done to enhance own-group status;miscommunication; trying to hurt

Withholding Making fun; unthinking use of stereotype; avoiding anuncertain or difficult situation; to avoid any sort ofrelationship; unable to predict your behaviour; distrusting;miscommunication

Workplace Not wanting to be seen with you; trying to include;unthinking use of stereotype; avoiding an uncertain ordifficult situation; unable to predict your behaviour; done toenhance own-group status; distrusting; taking an easieroption; miscommunication

others-not-intervening is also part of the contextual background that leads to moreeveryday discriminatory practices, so friends and even strangers by this argument have astrong social responsibility to intervene and change the contexts for these practices. Theirnot-intervening is partly maintaining the context for racial discrimination.

Many of the goals are probably entwined in current racial discriminationprogrammes, or get dealt with at a micro-level of detail and not reported. While this isgood in one way, it would be better to draw these out explicitly and eventually providebest-evidence guides for the more detailed intervention skills and training programmes(Guerin, 2005). Some examples were given elsewhere in a discussion of verbal forms ofracial discrimination, and how quite specific rejoinders to verbal abuse could be made(Guerin, 2003b).

Two further examples will be given of this from the ‘Housing” situations of Table 1.Both examples involved landlords and tenants getting together in various ways, andinstead of trying to globally understand each other’s cultures or build some empathy forthe other, the interventions consisted of discussing and then writing out agreements thatprotect the landlords from the worries they have (more like Tables 2 and 3 here), and thetenants from their concerns. In one of these, the 33 boroughs of Brent, in London,

GUERIN

62

TABLE 3. FUNCTIONS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATIONS AND POSSIBLE INTERVENTIONS

FUNCTIONS

POSSIBLE GENERIC INTERVENTION GOALS

(CARRIED OUT NOT ONLY BY THE VICTIM

BY ALSO BY OTHER INTERVENTION

AGENTS)

Assuming that you prefer avoidance Indicate willingness to form relationship;show sociability

Assuming you want this Correct assumptions

Avoiding an uncertain or difficult situation Show how the avoidance can hurt; train sothe situation becomes more certain;practice in handling such situations

Distrusting Show trustworthy; show missing out onbenefits; show that distrust itself engendersfurther distrust

Done to enhance own-group status Find alternative ways of enhancing groupstatus; make non-discrimination status-enhancing; find new groups; educategroups

Making fun Find alternative ways of making fun; findaudiences for this fun and educate, removeor change; increase monitoring andaccountability for making fun

Miscommunication Thorough questioning about sources;training in specific features

Not wanting to be seen with you Find the audiences for this behaviour andchange them

Not wanting you to fail and be hurt Show willingness to take risks; showbenefits of taking some risks; showbenefits of being active

Providing you a chance to stand out Train to assess whether you want to standout; train alternative ways of assisting;train that assisting might not always be best


63

Rigidity Show safe alternatives; explore otheroptions; explore diversity; increasemonitoring and accountability for rigidity

Taking an easier option Show that the easier option for you can stillhurt others; increase monitoring andaccountability for taking easier options

To avoid any sort of relationship Show that relationships can be temporary ifdesired; show that relationships can beworthwhile

To denigrate Find audiences for denigration and changethem; provide consequences fordenigration; increase monitoring andaccountability for denigration; removesocial status impact of denigration if any

Trying to exclude Find audiences for excluding and changethem; show no need to exclude; show whatthey missing out on by exclusion; showhow exclusion can hurt even if notintentional

Trying to hurt Find audiences for hurting and changethem; provide consequences for hurting;increase monitoring and accountability forhurting; remove social status impact ofhurting if any

Trying to include Show that this does not help include you;train other ways to help you be included

Unable to predict your behaviour Show that you are just an ordinary personin most ways and no different; take timefor the person to learn your ways

Unthinking use of stereotype Show that stereotyping hurts even ifinadvertent; demonstrate diversity; increasemonitoring and accountability forstereotyping

undertook to arrange discussion groups and community consultation in order to reach amutual agreement between landlord and tenant for the Somali community (Brent Council,2003). Somalis made up about 8-10,000 out of Brent’s total population of 250,000. Theyheld consultations and discussions culminating in a one-day conference during which

GUERIN

64

there were addresses and discussion groups, a social gathering, and a ‘repairs surgery’ inwhich the house repair manager and experts were present to answer questions and dealwith very specific repairs issues. An outcome was the formation of the Somali Residentsand Tenant’s Association. Again, this was much more like the strategies and goals inTable 3 than a global awareness intervention, and was specific to, and concrete in, thecontext.

As a second example of specificity, Kloos, Zimmerman, Scrimenti and Crusto(2002) dealt with housing discrimination against people with psychiatric and addictivedisabilities, rather than racially different groups, but the ideas are entirely relevant toproducing more specific interventions for racial discrimination in housing. They heldmutual talks like the Brent Council and developed clear and specific guidelines for theroles, responsibilities and rights (including what have been called here the strategies) ofthe tenants, landlords and service providers. In these cases, the service providers were theclinicians or case managers of the tenants but for racial discrimination other advocatescould fill in. Relationships between landlords and tenants were developed so that thelandlords became more like “partners for promoting success in supported housing”, ratherthan someone who gives a lease and hands over the key. Like the previous case, thebreakthrough seemed to come when the concerns of both parties were taken seriously anddealt with in a very concrete way, not when they came to understand or be more globallyaware of the other person. In both cases a detailed social relationship was brokered basedupon current strategies and solutions rather than on global harmony.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper has tried to open up new arenas for studying and changing racialdiscrimination by moving away from the abstract terms “racist” and “racism” to explorethe situational and functional contexts for the practices that are usually talked about inthose terms. Reasons were first given as to why the terms are not helpful, and thenspecific situations identified and specific strategies within those. More specific goals forinterventions were then proposed.

While the details given here are certainly not meant to be authoritative or final, it isbringing about a change in direction for research and intervention strategies that isimportant. The most effective strategies for intervention will need contextual analysis andresearch (Guerin, 2005), and my suggestions are not meant to pre-empt that research.Rather, the point is to sense those new possibilities in what we might achieve if we wereto change the conceptions within which the research is currently scaffolded. Moving fromTable 1 to Table 3 it is hoped this change is sensed.

In particular, it is being recommended that research and intervention on everydayracial discrimination practices:

• avoid abstract and general conceptions• avoid attributions of cause to ‘racism’ and ‘racists’


65

• spend far more time documenting the contexts for any racially discriminatingpractices

• document more fully the social contexts within which the racially discriminatingpractices strategically arise

• incorporate more intensive forms of research methodology for these last twopoints

We now need to see some empirical case-studies of such practices in specificsituations looking at functional analyses and interventions targeting the functionalanalysis.

While such conclusions seem less conceptually efficient and grandiose than we areused to reading, there are arguments that “small wins” provide more realistic andachievable goals (Weick, 1984). They might actually more useful, since the interventionsto ‘rid’ people of their racism have not produced lasting results. Finally, we must alsoremember that this paper explicitly excluded more violent and structural bases for raciallydiscriminating practices and these need to be treated in a similar way although differentforms of intervention are likely. They are just as important and will need to be integratedwith the attempts at creating new intervention possibilities proposed here.

REFERENCES

Akrami, N., Ekehammar, B., & Araya, T. (2000). Classical and modern racial prejudice: A studyof attitudes toward immigrants in Sweden. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 521-532. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1099-0992(200007/08)30:4<521::AID-EJSP5>3.0.CO;2-N

Allan, A., & Allan, M. M. (2000). The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission as atherapeutic tool. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 18, 459-477.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1099-0798(2000)18:4<459::AID-BSL366>3.0.CO;2-TAndall, J. (2002). Second generation attitude? African-Italians in Milan. Journal of Ethnic and

Migration Studies, 28, 389-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691830220146518Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (1997). The Jigsaw classroom (2nd ed.) New York: Longman.ATSIC. (1998). As a matter of fact: Answering the myths and misconceptions about Indigenous

Australians. Canberra: Australian Office of Public Affairs. [www.atsic.gov.au]Barnes, B., Palmary, I., & Durrheim, K. (2001). The denial of racism: The role of humor, personal

experience, and self-censorship. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 20, 321-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927X01020003003BBC News. (February, 2004). Sydney riots over Aborigine death. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-

/2/hi/asia-pacific/3491299.stmBell, E. L. J. E., & Nkomo, S. M. (1998). Armoring: Learning to withstand racial oppression.

Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 29, 285-295.Bentley, A. F. (1908). The process of government: A study of social pressures. Bloomington,

Indiana: Principia Press.Bentley, A. F. (1935). Behavior knowledge fact. Bloomington, Indiana: Principia Press.Bowling, B., Phillips, C., Campbell, A., & Docking, M. (2004). Policing and human rights:

Eliminating discrimination, xenophobia, intolerance and the abuse of power from policework. Identities, Conflict and Cohesion Programme Paper, Number 4: United NationsResearch Institute for Social Development.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1099-0992(200007/08)30:4<521::AID-EJSP5>3.0.CO;2-N

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1099-0798(2000)18:4<459::AID-BSL366>3.0.CO;2-T

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691830220146518

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927X01020003003

GUERIN

Brent Council. (2003). Brenthousing partnership. Somali tenants conference: Innovative methods in Black and Minority Ethnic Consultation. Brent Council: Wembley, England. Also on: [http://www.brent.gov.uk/bhp.nsf]

Brief, A. P., & Barsky, A. (2000). Establishing a climate for diversity: The inhibition of

prejudiced reactions in the workplace. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 19, 91-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(00)19004-8

Briggs, H. E., & Paulson, R. I. (1996). Racism. In M. A. Mattaini & B. A. Thyer (Eds.),

Finding solutions to social problems: Behavioral strategies for change (pp. 147-177). Washington, DC: APA.

Broman, C. L., Mavaddat, R., & Hsu, S-y. (2000). The experience and consequences of

perceived racial discrimination: A study of African-Americans. Journal of Black Psychology, 26, 165-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0095798400026002003

Brzuzy, S. (1998). Public policy interventions to prejudice. In M. L. Hecht (Ed.),

Communicating prejudice (pp. 326-333). London: Sage. Byng, M. D. (1998). Mediating discrimination: Resisting oppression among African-

American Muslim women. Social Problems, 45, 473-487. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3097208

Carroll, G. (1998). Mundane extreme environmental stress and African American families: A

case for recognizing different realities. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 29, 271-284.

Chambon, A. S., Hulchanski, J. D., Murdie, R. A., & Teixeira, C. (1997). Access to housing

in a Canadian city: Experiences of three immigrant groups. Paper given at the Urban Affairs Association Conference, Toronto. [http://www.library.utoronto.ca/hnc/publish/index.htm]

Connolly, P. (2000). Racism and young girls’ peer-group relations: The experiences of South

Asian girls. Sociology, 34, 499-519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/S0038038500000316 Connolly, P., & Keenan, M. (2002). Racist harassment in the white hinterlands: Minority

ethnic children and parents’ experiences of schooling in Northern Ireland. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23, 341-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0142569022000015391

Cowlishaw, G. (2004). Blackfellas, whitefellas and the hidden injuries of race. Oxford:

Blackwell Publishing. Cropley, A. (2002). Problems and concerns of welfare paraprofessionals working with

refugees. British Journal of Social Work, 32, 233-245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/32.2.233

Day, D. (1998). Being ascribed, and resisting, membership of an ethnic group. In C. Antaki

& S. Widdicombe (Eds.), Identities in talk (pp. 151-170). London: Sage. Deitch, E. A., Barsky, A., Butz, R. M., Chan, S., Brief, A. P., & Bradley, J. C. (2003). Subtle

yet significant: The existence and impact of everyday racial discrimination in the workplace. Human Relations, 56, 1299-1324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00187267035611002


67

Dion, K. L. (2001). Immigrants’ perceptions of housing discrimination in Toronto: The Housing New Canadians Project. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 523-539. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00227

Dixon, J. A., & Durrheim, K. (2003). Contact and the ecology of racial division: Some

varieties of informal segregation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466603763276090

Donovan, R. J., & Leivers, S. (1993). Using paid advertising to modify racial stereotype

beliefs. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 205-218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/269366 Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1993). Language and causation: A discursive action model of

description and attribution. Psychological Review, 100, 23-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.1.23

Essed, P. (1991a). Understanding everyday racism. London: Sage. Essed, P. (1991b). Knowledge and resistance: Black women talk about racism in the

Netherlands and the USA. Feminism & Psychology, 1, 201-219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959353591012003

Feagin, J. R. (1991). The continuing significance of race: Antiblack discrimination in public

places. American Sociological Review, 56, 101-116. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2095676

Fernández-Calienes, R. (1995). Racism and multiculturalism in Australia: A case study of

the church as an agent of positive social change. In J. Collins (Ed.), Confronting racism in Australia, Canada and New Zealand (Vol. 2, pp. 217-235). University of Technology, Sydney: Faculty of Business.

Flippen, C. A. (2001). Residential segregation and minority home ownership. Social Science

Research, 30, 337-362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ssre.2001.0701 Goto, S. G., Gee, G. C., & Tekeuchi, D. T. (2002). Strangers still? The experience of

discrimination among Chinese Americans. Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 211-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcop.9998

Graves, S. B. (1999). Television and prejudice reduction: When does television as a

vicarious experience make a difference? Journal of Social Issues, 55(4), 707-727. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00143

Guerin, B. (2001a). Individuals as social relationships: 18 ways that acting alone can be

thought of as social behavior. Review of General Psychology, 5, 406-428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.406

Guerin, B. (2001b). Replacing catharsis and uncertainty reduction theories with descriptions

of the historical and social context. Review of General Psychology, 5, 44-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.5.1.44

Guerin, B. (2002). Structural sources of conflict. In Conflict resolution (Theme 1.40) in

Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS). Eolss Publishers: Oxford, UK, [http://www.eolss.net]

Guerin, B. (2003a). Language use as social strategy: A review and an analytic framework for

the social sciences. Review of General Psychology, 7, 251-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.3.251

GUERIN

Guerin, B. (2003b). Combating prejudice and racism: New interventions from a functional

analysis of racist language. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 13, 29-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/casp.699

Guerin, B. (2004). Handbook for analyzing the social strategies of everyday life. Reno, NV:

Context Press. Guerin, B. (2005). Handbook of interventions for changing people and communities. Reno,

NV: Context Press. Gunaratnam, Y. (2001). ‘We mustn’t judge people…but’: Staff dilemmas in dealing with

racial harassment amongst hospice service users. Sociology of Health & Illness, 23, 65-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.00241

Hein, J. (2000). Interpersonal discrimination against Hmong Americans: Parallels and

variation in microlevel racial inequality. Sociological Quarterly, 41, 413-429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2000.tb00085.x

Hewstone, M. (1996). Contact and categorization: Social psychological interventions to

change intergroup relations. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes & stereotyping (pp. 323-368). New York: Guilford.

Hill, M. E., & Augoustinos, M. (2001). Stereotype change and prejudice reduction: Short-

and long-term evaluation of a cross-cultural awareness programme. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 11, 243-262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/casp.629

Hollands, M. (2001). Upon closer acquaintance: The impact of direct contact with refugees

on Dutch hosts. Journal of Refugee Studies, 14, 295-314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jrs/14.3.295

Holmes, J., Marra, M., & Burns, L. (2001). Women’s humour in the workplace: A

quantitative analysis. Australian Journal of Communication, 28, 83-108. Hopkins, N., Hewstone, M., & Hantzi, A. (1992). Police-schools liaison and young people’s

image of the police: An intervention evaluation. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 203-220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1992.tb02435.x

Howitt, D., & Owusu-Bempah, J. (1999). The pragmatics of institutional racism: Beyond

words. Human Relations, 43, 885-899. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679004300905

Katz, P. A., & Zalk, S. R. (1978). Modification of children's racial attitudes. Developmental

Psychology, 14, 447-461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.14.5.447

Kiselica, M. S., Maben, P., & Locke, D. C. (1999). Do multicultural education and diversity appreciation training reduce prejudice among counseling trainees? Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 21, 240-254.

Kitzinger, C. (2000). How to resist an idiom. Research on Language and Social Interaction,

33, 121-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3302_1


69

Kloos, B., Zimmerman, S. O., Scrimenti, K., & Crusto, C. (2002). Landlords as partners for promoting success in supported housing: “It takes more than a lease and a key”. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25, 235-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0095019

Lamont, M., Morning, A., & Mooney, M. (2002). Particular universalisms: North African

immigrants respond to French racism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25, 390-414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01419870020036701e

Liebkind, K., & McAlister, A. L. (1999). Extended contact through peer modelling to

promote tolerance in Finland. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 765-780. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199908/09)29:5/6<765::AID-EJSP958>3.0.CO;2-J

Lindsley, S. L. (1998). Organizational interventions to prejudice. In M. L. Hecht (Ed.),

Communicating prejudice (pp. 302-310). London: Sage. Mellor, K. (2003). Contemporary racism in Australia: The experiences of Aborigines.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 474-486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167202250914

Mellor, K. (2004). The experiences of Vietnamese in Australia: The racist tradition

continues. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 30, 631-658. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691830410001699496

Mesthenos, E., & Ioannidi, E. (2002). Obstacles to refugee integration in the European Union

member states. Journal of Refugee Studies, 15, 304-320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jrs/15.3.304

Miller, J. G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 961-978. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.5.961

Morgan, G. (1999). The moral surveillance of Aboriginal applicants for public housing in

New South Wales. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 2, 3-14. Murdie, R. A. (1999). The housing careers of Polish and Somali newcomers in Toronto’s

rental market. Housing Studies, 17, 423-443. Also on: [http://www.library.utoronto.ca/hnc/publish/index.htm] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030220134935

Murdie, R. A., Chambon, A. S., Hulchanki, J. D., & Teixeira, C. (1995). Housing issues

facing immigrants and refugees in Greater Toronto: Initial findings from the Jamaican, Polish and Somali communities. [http://www.library.utoronto.ca/hnc/publish/index.htm]

Novac, S. (1996). Immigrant enclaves and residential segregation: Voices of racialized

refugee and immigrant women. [http://www.library.utoronto.ca/hnc/publish/index.htm]

Ottawa Citizen. (Jul, 20th 2003). Teens accuse police of racism. Accessed from www on 11th

October, 2003. Peach, C. (1998). South Asian and Caribbean ethnic minority housing choice in Britain.

Urban Studies, 35, 1657-1680. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098984097

GUERIN

Pedersen, A., Walker, I, & Wise, M. (2005). “Talk does not cook rice”: Beyond anti-racism

rhetoric to strategies for social action. The Australian Psychologist, 40, 20-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0005006051233131729

Pepler, D., Connolloy, J., & Craig, W. (1999). Bullying and harassment: Experiences of

minority and immigrant youth. [http://ceris.metropolis.net/Virtual%20Library/education/pepler1/pepler1.html]

Pulido, L. (2000). Rethinking environmental racism: White privilege and urban development

in Southern California. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90, 12-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0004-5608.00182

Ratcliffe, P. (1999). Housing inequality and ‘race’: Some critical reflections on the concept

of social exclusion’. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22, 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/014198799329576

Reid, C., & Holland, W. (1996). Aboriginal Rural Education Program: A case study in anti-

racist strategies. In E. Vasta & S. Castles (Eds.), The teeth are smiling: The persistence of racism in multicultural Australia (pp. 112-129). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Salzer, M. S. (2000). Towards a narrative conceptualization of stereotypes: Contextualizing

perceptions of public housing residents. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 123-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298(200003/04)10:2<123::AID-CASP556>3.0.CO;2-6

Sandhu, D. S., & Aspy, C. B. (1997). Counseling for prejudice prevention and reduction.

Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association. Slone, M., Tarrasch, R., & Hallis, D. (2000). Ethnic stereotypic attitudes among Israeli

children: Two intervention programs. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46, 370-389. Smail, D. (2001). De-psychologizing community psychology. Journal of Community &

Applied Social Psychology, 11, 159-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/casp.621 Søholt, S. (2001). Ethnic minority groups and strategies in the housing market in Oslo.

European Journal of Housing Policy, 1, 337-356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14616710110091536

St. Jean, Y., & Feagin, J. R. (1998). The family costs of white racism: The case of African

American families. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 29, 297-312. Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of

Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349-367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1977.10-349 Swim, J. K., Hyers, L. L., Cohen, L. L. Fitzgerald, D. C., & Bylsma, W. H. (2003). African

American college students’ experiences with everyday racism: Characteristics and responses to these incidents. Journal of Black Psychology, 28, 38-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0095798402239228

Trudgen, R. (2000). Why warriors lie down and die: Towards an understanding of why the

Aboriginal people of Arnhem Land face the greatest crisis in health and education since European contact. Darwin, Australia: Aboriginal Resource and Development Services.


71

Tusting, SA., Crawshaw, R., Callen, B. (2002). ‘I know ‘cos I was there’: How residence

abroad students use personal experience to legitimate cultural generalizations. Discourse & Society, 13, 651-672. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926502013005278

van Dijk, T. A. (1983). Cognitive and conversational strategies in the expression of ethnic

prejudice. Text, 3, 375-404. van Dijk, T. A. (1987). Communicating racism: Ethnic prejudice in thought and talk.

London: Sage. van Dijk, T. A. (1992). Discourse and the denial of racism. Discourse & Society, 3, 87-118.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926592003001005 Veelenturf, S., Guerin, B., & Guerin, P. B. (2005). Veils, Muslim women, and discrimination.

Paper presented at “On the Frontiers: New public goods research on population, migration and community dynamics” conference. March/April 2005, Wellington. [www.waikato.ac.nz/wfass/migration]

Verkuyten, M. (2001). Discourses about ethnic group (de-)essentialism: Oppressive and

progressive aspects. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 371-391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466603322438215

Verkuyten, M. (2003). ‘Abnormalization’ of ethnic minorities in conversation. British

Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 257-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466601164849

Vrij, A., & Smith, B. J. (1999). Reducing ethnic prejudice by public campaigns: An

evaluation of a present and a new campaign. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 9, 195-215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298(199905/06)9:3<195::AID-CASP504>3.0.CO;2-#

Weick, K. E. (1984). Small wins: Redefining the scale of social problems. American

Psychologist, 39, 40-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.1.40 Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the

legitimation of exploitation. New York: Columbia University Press. Wilkinson, S., & Kitzinger, C. (2000). Thinking differently about thinking positive: A

discursive approach to cancer patients’ talk. Social Science & Medicine, 50, 597-811.

Zajicek, A. M. (2002). Race discourses and antiracist practices in a local women’s

movement. Gender & Society, 16, 155-174.

r d r : n ideas from a ontextual nalysis · 2019. 4. 30. · violent,” “racists are bad”;...

Documents